Bump
* Bump * - I too am extremely interested. (Can't decide if between the two - and I have a 5D) I'd like to see/know about the contrast and sharpness quality of both of them.
Mine: Canon 20D, 50 f1.8 II, 28-105 II, 70-200 f2.8L, T 70-300 Macro, T 2X expander, 12-24 Sigma Hers: Sony SR10, (Soon Canon 5D MKII), 85 f1.8, 28-135 USM, Stroboframe, Manfrotto NeoTec Ours: Pair of 580 EX, Lensbaby, Studio Alien Bees, Son & TWO Daughters
* Bump * - I too am extremely interested. (Can't decide if between the two - and I have a 5D) I'd like to see/know about the contrast and sharpness quality of both of them.
well to start, the 10-20 is for crop bodies, the 12-24 is for full frame (I think)
well to start, the 10-20 is for crop bodies, the 12-24 is for full frame (I think)
Yeah - and it has been mentioned here before - but the quality of glass between the 12-24, and the 10-20 (Just looking at the MTF charts) seems different enough to compare the two. I'm almost willing to get the 10-20 and just crop the vignette on my 5D and shoot primarily with my 20D - but anyway I was hoping to find out the quality (Examples?) difference between the two.
Mine: Canon 20D, 50 f1.8 II, 28-105 II, 70-200 f2.8L, T 70-300 Macro, T 2X expander, 12-24 Sigma Hers: Sony SR10, (Soon Canon 5D MKII), 85 f1.8, 28-135 USM, Stroboframe, Manfrotto NeoTec Ours: Pair of 580 EX, Lensbaby, Studio Alien Bees, Son & TWO Daughters
Yeah - and it has been mentioned here before - but the quality of glass between the 12-24, and the 10-20 (Just looking at the MTF charts) seems different enough to compare the two. I'm almost willing to get the 10-20 and just crop the vignette on my 5D and shoot primarily with my 20D - but anyway I was hoping to find out the quality (Examples?) difference between the two.
Here is a link to a 10-20 Flickr tag of someone who wrote a review of the lens at FM, these are NOT my pics. Looks like lots of distortion and CA. Many people report examples with a soft side or corner.
... but anyway I was hoping to find out the quality (Examples?) difference between the two.
I am not sure I have seen those two compared, but I have seen the Sigma 10-20 compared with many others. For example, a nice review vs the Canon 10-22, (which rates very high)
here is a summary statement from 'lightrules" (formerly fstopjojo):
"Overall, these are 2 impressive UWA lenses with the Canon being IMO slightly better optically, though the build advantage goes to the Sigma. While I own the Sigma (and thoroughly intend to keep it), the Canon certainly impresses. FWIW, I've reviewed countless full-frame captures of each lens both on screen (and printed out some comparison 8x10s), and by and far, it's EXTREMELY HARD to see any meaningful difference, save for the difference in color tone. If you shoot in RAW, it isn't an issue at all. Both lenses will satisfy as your UWA lens in your bag. And if you don't mind starting at 12mm, the Tokie is a VERY good one too. "
Comments
* Bump * - I too am extremely interested. (Can't decide if between the two - and I have a 5D) I'd like to see/know about the contrast and sharpness quality of both of them.
Hers: Sony SR10, (Soon Canon 5D MKII), 85 f1.8, 28-135 USM, Stroboframe, Manfrotto NeoTec
Ours: Pair of 580 EX, Lensbaby, Studio Alien Bees, Son & TWO Daughters
Yeah - and it has been mentioned here before - but the quality of glass between the 12-24, and the 10-20 (Just looking at the MTF charts) seems different enough to compare the two. I'm almost willing to get the 10-20 and just crop the vignette on my 5D and shoot primarily with my 20D - but anyway I was hoping to find out the quality (Examples?) difference between the two.
Hers: Sony SR10, (Soon Canon 5D MKII), 85 f1.8, 28-135 USM, Stroboframe, Manfrotto NeoTec
Ours: Pair of 580 EX, Lensbaby, Studio Alien Bees, Son & TWO Daughters
Here is a link to a 10-20 Flickr tag of someone who wrote a review of the lens at FM, these are NOT my pics. Looks like lots of distortion and CA. Many people report examples with a soft side or corner.
Check it out.
Look the close-up portrait of the man smelling the rose, SUPER distorted that close, but high distortion is to be expected in something with a 102 degree angle of view.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gomox/tags/sigma1020f456exdchsm/
http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/uwatest
here is a summary statement from 'lightrules" (formerly fstopjojo):
"Overall, these are 2 impressive UWA lenses with the Canon being IMO slightly better optically, though the build advantage goes to the Sigma. While I own the Sigma (and thoroughly intend to keep it), the Canon certainly impresses. FWIW, I've reviewed countless full-frame captures of each lens both on screen (and printed out some comparison 8x10s), and by and far, it's EXTREMELY HARD to see any meaningful difference, save for the difference in color tone. If you shoot in RAW, it isn't an issue at all. Both lenses will satisfy as your UWA lens in your bag. And if you don't mind starting at 12mm, the Tokie is a VERY good one too. "